Mitt lost like a Mormon

[_Philidel]

This denial of reality makes me think back to the impact that Jesus' execution must have had on early Christians. Could it be that the resurrection narratives grew from a collective denial that such a terrible thing could really have happened at all, or at least that if it did happen, he was not really dead?

Interesting question, Chap.

[_Philidel]

Here's an example of why Romney and his supporters were so blindsided:

http://stallioncornell.com/?p=2206

No fewer than five people approached me at church yesterday, looking for good news and reassurance. Can Romney still win? Yes, of course. Will Romney win? Yes, of course. Nobody asked me the question I’ve been asking myself for quite some time: can Obama win?

Very, very doubtful.

But yes, he can still win. He’s losing independents by as much as 22 points, as indicated by today’s CNN poll; he’s battling for states that should’ve been sewn up for him months ago, and he’s an incumbent well under 50% the day before the election. He’s panicked and peevish while his opponent is calm and confident. Paul Ryan can draw a crowd of over 6,000 in deep blue Minnesota, but the sitting vice president can only get 1,100 folks to come hear him in Wisconsin. And Mitt Romney’s crowd of 30,000+ in PA yesterday has to be sending a few shivers up Obama’s spine.

Candidates in his position lose far more often than not, but could lightning strike and we wake up Wednesday morning with the harsh reality of four more years of this failed presidency darkening the horizon?

Yes. Unlikely, but possible.

These people really were living in an alternate reality. It is very reminiscent of LDS apologetics.

Thanks for the example, Beastie. I hadn't seen this. There are many others. It does seem they were living in an alternative reality. And I agree it is similar to that of the LDS apologetics world.

ETA: I'd like to add another thought, hoping I don't derail the thread. I kept hearing (in the media) Romney supporters claim that if Obama were re-elected, America would be the laughing stock of the world, that his Presidency was a signal of American weakness. However, I live outside the States, and my experience reflects the contrary. I acknowledge this is only anecdotal, but people outside America have congratulated my spouse and me. One friend told me he had never seen the European press so uniformly in favour of one candidate, Obama, as he had this year. Acquaintances from the Middle East were also congratulating me. Who was feeding this myth among American conservatives that Obama makes the US a laughing stock?

[_DrW]

Thanks for the example, Beastie. I hadn't seen this. There are many others. It does seem they were living in an alternative reality. And I agree it is similar to that of the LDS apologetics world.

ETA: I'd like to add another thought, hoping I don't derail the thread. I kept hearing (in the media) Romney supporters claim that if Obama were re-elected, America would be the laughing stock of the world, that his Presidency was a signal of American weakness. However, I live outside the States, and my experience reflects the contrary. I acknowledge this is only anecdotal, but people outside America have congratulated my spouse and me. One friend told me he had never seen the European press so uniformly in favour of one candidate, Obama, as he had this year. Acquaintances from the Middle East were also congratulating me. Who was feeding this myth among American conservatives that Obama makes the US a laughing stock?

+1.

I live outside the US as well and can say without a doubt that the election of Romney would have damaged US credibility - severely.

I can think of no country, or leader of a country, who would have rather seen Romney as President than Barack Obama. First of all Romney is an unknown outside the US. Secondly during the campaign he managed to insult many of our allies and potential enemies alike.

Folks outside the US mainly saw Romney for what he is, a wealthy opportunist with no real principles. One only need to think about what the other Republicans said about Mitt Romney before they finally figured out that he was the best they had. And the best they had was not very good.

President Obama is the most popular President overseas in recent memory. In fact, one would probably have to go back several decades, perhaps as far as John Kennedy, to find a US President who was as well liked, and respected, outside the US.

[Guest]

What was interesting to me was just how intelligent in the allocation of resources for maximum effectiveness the Obama campaign was. They clearly had an idea of how things were going to be, and how low of a threat the Romney campaign was. Really, they spent their money in the battleground states, and pretty much left it at that.

Prior to the Republican nomination I was talking to a staunch Democrat, and mentioned that the only way Romney could win was by choosing Rubio from Florida. When he went with Ryan I knew then and there the campaign was over. Rubio could've hit Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico hard... And I truly believe they would've captured Florida with his nomination (positioning him for a Presidential run later). Having chosen a White Male to secure the "battleground states" was a huge mistake.

I voted for Romney, by the way.

How's that for an anti-Mormon? Droopy. You giant piece of crap. I voted for a Mormon. How's that cognitive dissonance feeling right about now?

- VRDRC

[_Chap]

What was interesting to me was just how lazy the Obama campaign was. They clearly had an idea of how things were going to be, and how low of a threat the Romney campaign was. Really, they spent their money in the battleground states, and pretty much left it at that. ...

Would you consider amending the underlined word to "intelligent in the allocation of resources for maximum effectiveness"?

the election of Romney would have damaged US credibility - severely.

I can think of no country, or leader of a country, who would have rather seen Romney as President than Barack Obama. First of all Romney is an unknown outside the US. Secondly during the campaign he managed to insult many of our allies and potential enemies alike.

Yes, in spades.

One opinion from a major non-US commentator that stuck in my mind as the election neared was that Romney's election would signal to people all over the world that the 'crazification of America' (meaning the tendency to believe in things not in accord with reality, just because people wish they really were that way) was both confirmed and steadily accelerating.

[_Philidel]

One opinion from a major non-US commentator that stuck in my mind as the election neared was that Romney's election would signal to people all over the world that the 'crazification of America' (meaning the tendency to believe in things not in accord with reality, just because people wish they really were that way) was both confirmed and steadily accelerating.

I agree. That would have been the world's interpretation, had Romney been elected.

[_lulu]

Not to beat it to death, but the Numbers Man Didn't See it Coming.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... s_bad.html

[_Philidel]

Some observations of parallels I see:

Overstating Statistics: The LDS church, like Mitt, consistently overstates its own following and growth. Furthermore, the LDS church, like Mitt, appears to truly believe its own statistics. Furthermore, both Mitt and the LDS church appear to try and use bad statistics to try and sell people on their brand, which would then lead to better statistics. In other words, if you can get people to believe that you are growing, people might jump on the bandwagon and actually make it a reality.

Well organized and persistent, but ineffective: Mitt put together a well oiled corporate machine for managing his campaign. He has spent more time trying to get elected than just about any other person in history. He spent 6 straight years of his life campaigning and setting up his support organization. But on election night, he couldn't even muster as many voters as John McCain had.

Likewise, on paper the LDS church has the best organized missionary force, but is far less effective than other groups. The most direct group for comparing Mormons are the JWs. They tend to compete in similar markets and use similar door-to-door proselyting strategies. Mormon missionaries have corporate sponsored preparation time, have a tremendous support team in the form of GA and mission offices, standardized materials, etc. Mormon missionaries are generally seen as clean cut and good kids. On paper the LDS missionary force should be outperforming the JWs, but the statistics show the exact opposite, the JW's are far more effective than are Mormons.

Compare these observations with this from RNC Political Director Rick Wiley in a memo http://www.gop.com/news/gop-blog/for-democrats-its-ground-game-over/ issued the day before the election:

In Colorado there are over 26,000 (34%) more high-propensity Republican voters available than high-propensity Democrat voters. In Florida there are 166,000 (21%) more; 85,000 (47%) more in Iowa; and 16,000 (22%) more in Nevada.

And in Ohio, Republicans have 368,000 more high-propensity voters available than Democrats–72 percent more, in fact–and enough to off-set the Obama campaign’s most optimistic (and unrealistic) early vote math.

In contrast, this is what it looked like to people who were studying the data in an effort the see what was really there, not what they believed they would find:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/j ... -lost.html

[_DarkHelmet]

What was interesting to me was just how lazy the Obama campaign was. They clearly had an idea of how things were going to be, and how low of a threat the Romney campaign was. Really, they spent their money in the battleground states, and pretty much left it at that. ...

Would you consider amending the underlined word to "intelligent in the allocation of resources for maximum effectiveness"?

the election of Romney would have damaged US credibility - severely.

I can think of no country, or leader of a country, who would have rather seen Romney as President than Barack Obama. First of all Romney is an unknown outside the US. Secondly during the campaign he managed to insult many of our allies and potential enemies alike.

Yes, in spades.

One opinion from a major non-US commentator that stuck in my mind as the election neared was that Romney's election would signal to people all over the world that the 'crazification of America' (meaning the tendency to believe in things not in accord with reality, just because people wish they really were that way) was both confirmed and steadily accelerating.

I've never worried much about what the rest of the world thinks about our elections. I don't waste my time thinking about elections in other countries. They know we have a presidential election every 4 years. If they don't like who we elect, they can wait 4 years.

[_harmony]

I don't think Romney's Mormonism had much to do with the loss.

I think he lost because he's rich. And because he's rich, he didn't take into account many of the groups that eventually lost him the election. Evangelicals were not the problem; Hispanics were.

Welcome to the new world order.